After he was interrupted, several times, by CODEPINK founder Medea Benjamin during his foreign policy speech on Thursday, President Obama said: "The voice of that woman is worth paying attention to."

I agree with that part of his response, which was met with applause in the room. I rather liked the questions that Benjamin shouted out before and as she was eventually led out of the room. She offered a pretty well constructed set of thoughts and questions, particularly under the circumstances. And I'd love to hear the President's answers to a few of her questions.

Here's what she said, as well as I was able to capture her remarks from the video...

It's not Congress. It's you, sir. There are 102 people on a hunger strike [in the Guantanamo Bay prison]. These are desperate people. 86 have been cleared for release. You are Commander-in-Chief. You can close Guantanamo today. You can release those 86 prisoners today.
...
How about Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, a 16-year-old American killed by drones. Is that the way we treat a 16-year-old American? Why was he killed? Can you tell us why Abdulrahman al-Awlaki was killed?

Can you tell the Muslim people their lives are as precious as our lives? Can you take the drones out of the hands of the CIA? Can you stop the signature strikes that are killing people on the basis of suspicious activities? Will you apologize to the thousands of Muslims that you have killed? Will you compensate the innocent family victims? That will make us safer here at home.

I love my country! I love the rule of law! The drones are making us less safe. And keeping people in indefinite detention in Guantanamo is making us less safe. Abide by the rule of law. You're a Constitutional lawyer!

For the record, the President absolutely can release the 86 prisoners who have been cleared for release immediately, as Benjamin noted. He does not have to, as he likes to suggest, get approval from Congress to do that. He can release them immediately. He only needs Congressional approval to move prisoners (such as the ones who may actually face some sort of trial or military tribunal) to another prison on the U.S. mainland.

Despite his assertions to the contrary, as seen in the video below, Obama did not address the concerns of Benjamin. He did not explain why 16-year-old U.S. citizen Abdulrahman al-Awlaki was killed. He did not answer whether drone strikes would be taken out of the hands of the unaccountable CIA and given to the slightly-more-accountable military. He did not respond to the question about compensation to the families of innocent victims killed in drone strikes. He did not speak to whether "signature strikes" with drones (attacks based on profiles of those believed to be gathered at a particular location, rather than a specific person believed to be in the group) would be ended. He should address all of those issues.

* * *

Video of the section of his speech during which the President was interrupted several times by Benjamin --- remarkably, she was not removed the first several times --- and his responses to her, follows below...

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Medea, having watched interruptions of presidents over many decades, I was struck by the fact that you got to interrupt him three different times in that speech. I’m wondering, do you get a sense --- did you get a sense they were going --- usually, after the first or maybe the second time, the Secret Service would move in to drag people away. But did you get a sense that maybe, to some degree, his people didn’t mind the interruptions, to the degree that he was then able to show that he is confronting opposition on the left to his policies?

MEDEA BENJAMIN: No, not at all. That’s not the way it went down, Juan. What you didn’t see is what was happening behind the scenes, of the Secret Service, the FBI, the people from the base coming over and saying, "You must come with us immediately, or you’ll be under arrest," and trying to grab me. And I was saying, "Don’t touch me. I’ll scream. You don’t want to make a scene in front of the president. You will regret this if you do it." And they were really confused about what to do.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: So, no order came down immediately to remove you then from the --- after the first interruption?

MEDEA BENJAMIN: They all came down immediately, and they didn’t know what to do, so they sat down next to me. They sat down behind me. They got up again. They told me I must leave. I said, "No, I’m not leaving." This was all going on in between those three interruptions.

No, I believe you are incorrect. The first time that the Pres gave an executive order to close gitmo, the reason it failed was, the Republicans claimed they would not approve MONEY to do the transfering to the States, and the transferring to the other country. NOW, Yeman is demanding $100M do accept their's back. Congress must approve the money!!

Without furnishing a link, PBerg @2 claims that Obama cannot release the Guantanamo detainees because Republicans will not approve the funds needed to transfer them to the U.S. and because "Yemen is demanding $100M to accept theirs back."

PBerg conveniently forgets that back in 2009, Democrats held significant majorities in both Houses of Congress. As revealed by Josh Rogin, "back in 2009, the White House dropped the ball on closing the controversial military prison by failing to come up with a plan in time, refusing to help House Democrats who were fighting for its closure, and then abandoning the plan altogether and blaming Republicans."

The 86 who have been cleared for release, 56 of whom are from Yemen, are not rotting in Guantanamo jail cells because of a lack of Congressional funds, but because, in 2010, Obama imposed a moratorium on their repatriation to Yemen "due to reports that an al Qaeda affiliate in Yemen was behind a failed attempt to blow up a U.S. airplane on Christmas Day 2009."

I've found nothing on-line to support PBerg's claim that "Yemen is demanding $100M" in order for those cleared detainees to be returned. Such a position would be at odds with Yemen's demand for their return.

From Reuters Friday:
Lifting the ban does not mean transfers to Yemen will immediately take place. Current law requires the Defense Department to certify for each transferred prisoner that the destination country is not a state sponsor of terrorism and would take action to make sure the individual would not threaten the United States.

Unless those provisions are removed or expire, they would have to be followed. No prisoners have been certified yet so it is not known how long the process takes.

In this thread, you pasted the same quote, but said it was from AP. Which one is it?

In either case, as you continue to make excuses for the President in several different threads at once, as far as I know, Yemen is not "a state sponsor of terrorism". If they are, that would be kinda awkward, since they are an ally of ours, and work with the U.S. to allow drone strikes against (supposed) terrorists in their country.

If they are "a state sponsor of terrorism", then I guess the U.S. will have to invade the U.S., since we are allies with "a state sponsor of terrorism" which, under the Bush/Obama doctrine, makes us a terrorist state as well.

So, that is not holding up the release of the hostages Yemeni prisoners at Guantanamo who were cleared for release by the Government as long ago as 2009, after they were found, way back then, to pose no threat to the U.S.

(And they were scheduled for release until the Christmas Day underpants bomber in 2009 led to a moratorium on the release of those prisoners.)

So what's your excuse for Obama not doing the right thing (and otherwise misdirecting the American people about it) now?

I suspected that Medea might show up on DN after her performance at Obomber's speech, and Amy did not disappoint. Amy Goodman is one of the very few real journalists working in this country today at a national level. You would never catch her palling around with the elite at the press corp dinner. It is the job of the press to be a pain in the ass, not a bunch of ass clowns.

Irwin,
Yeah, cuz in our greatest of all countries it's so very easy to get an audience with those in the upper echelons of power. Uh huh. And if by some miracle they did give you ten minutes, you wouldn't need more than that anyway cuz they are so very responsive, listen to our concerns, and then act, gosh darnit. Uh huh. Uh huh. And it's not like if you just do everything in the normally prescribed, dictated way, as those in power would like, it's not like they're not doing everything they can to seriously, conscientiously address any number of completely urgent situations. Uh huh. Uh huh. Uh huh.

@David: The President should have plenty of time to talk to concerned Senators and Congressmen, and other VIPs, since absolutely nothing will be allowed through the House and Senate except the bare minimum budget resolutions until a change is made. Not even recess appointments thanks to SCOTUS.